Re: [PATCH v3 18/18] KVM: arm64: Plumb the pKVM MMU in KVM

[Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>]

On Tue, 17 Dec 2024 14:31:35 +0000,
Quentin Perret <qperret@google.com> wrote:
> 
> On Tuesday 17 Dec 2024 at 14:03:37 (+0000), Marc Zyngier wrote:
> > My gripe with this is that it makes it much harder to follow what is
> > happening by using tags (ctags, etags, whatever). I ended up with the
> > hack below, which is super ugly, but preserves the tagging
> > functionality for non-pKVM.
> 
> Ack.
> 
> > I'll scratch my head to find something more elegant...
> 
> I find your proposal pretty reasonable -- I had a few different ideas
> but they were all really over-engineered, so I figured relying on a
> naming convention was the simplest. And any divergence will be flagged
> at compile time, so that shouldn't be too hard to maintain looking
> forward.
> 
> The __S2 name isn't massively descriptive though. Maybe KVM_PGT_CALL()
> or something? Thinking about it, this abstraction doesn't need to be
> restricted to stage-2 stuff. We could most likely hide the
> __pkvm_host_{un}share_hyp() logic behind a pkvm_pgtable_hyp_{un}map()
> implementation in pkvm.c as well...

Oh, I'm happy with *any* name. I just changed it to make sure any
missing occurrence would blow up.

And yes, if we can make that more uniform, I'm all for that.

Thanks,

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.